Babaso Anandrao Khot vs Sanjay Bapuso Patil Advocate - A. J. More — 1500014/2012

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 30. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.

Darkhast - Execution Petition

CNR: MHKO120005352012

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

18th June 2026

Filing Number

150014/2012

Filing Date

31-12-2012

Registration No

1500014/2012

Registration Date

31-12-2012

Court

Civil and Criminal Court , Gargoti

Judge

1-Civil Judge J.M.F.C.Gargoti

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 30

Petitioner(s)

Babaso Anandrao Khot

Adv. S. D. Bhosale

Respondent(s)

Sanjay Bapuso Patil Advocate - A. J. More

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.M.F.C.Gargoti

20-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

16-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

21-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

04-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

24-11-2025

Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

Interim Orders

27-10-2025
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: The petition filed by Babaso Anandrao Khot objecting to the inclusion of properties (Gate No. 163 and 240) in debt recovery proceedings was allowed. The court found that the objector, being a co-heir with legitimate share in the disputed properties, raised valid grounds that these properties should be excluded from attachment. The court ordered removal of the specified properties from the debt recovery proceedings, while directing the creditor's claim to be satisfied from the debtor's own separate assets instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The petition filed by Babaso Anandrao Khot objecting to the inclusion of properties (Gate No. 163 and 240) in debt recovery proceedings was allowed. The court found that the objector, being a co-heir with legitimate share in the disputed properties, raised valid grounds that these properties should be excluded from attachment. The court ordered removal of the specified properties from the debt recovery proceedings, while directing the creditor's claim to be satisfied from the debtor's own separate assets instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil and Criminal Court , Gargoti All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case